Why We Won't Win It All

[Tunescribe]

the rational mind has to conclude that their chances of winning it all are remote without Gronkowski.

Screw that. The "rational mind" causes folks like you to turn off the television or leave the stadium with the Patriots down by 12 with 2 minutes left. Your line of thinking is best reserved for hindsight, not to concede defeat before it happens.

 

[Ring 6]

While red zone efficiency is certainly one stat worth looking at, but I would not go so far as to proclaim that is so important that it is the difference between winning and losing in the NFL.


First, a look at some of the top ten Red-Zone offenses in the NFL in 2013.

3. Dallas (70.5%); currently 7-7, 10th in the NFC playoff picture
4. Detroit (61.2%); currently 7-6, 8th in the NFC
5. Oakland (59.5%); 4-10, 13th in the AFC, eliminated
8. Cleveland (58.1%); 4-10, 15th, eliminated
9. Tennessee (57.8%); 5-9, 11th, eliminated


Next, among the bottom five there are a pair of potential playoff teams:

31. Philadelphia (45.8%); 8-6, currently #3 seed in the NFC
28. Green Bay (49.1%); 7-6-1, a half-game off the NFC North lead


Now a look at some of the top Red Zone defenses:

2. Baltimore (39.4%); 7-6, currently in 7th in the AFC
3. Detroit (40.0%); a top-5 RZ team in both categories is 7-6
5. NY Jets (45.5%); 6-8, 10th, eliminated
6. Tampa Bay (45.5%); 4-10, 14th, eliminated
7. Buffalo (48.9%); 5-9, 12th, eliminated
9. St. Louis (52.7%); 6-8, 11th, eliminated

And among the worst red zone defenses are the #25 Colts (clinched a playoff spot), #26 Denver (#1 seed) and #27 San Diego (7-7, on the bubble one game behind Miami).



While I do agree that red zone play is important (and that it needs to improve for the Patriots), I would also suggest that it is not an absolute difference between winning and losing in the NFL.

How dare you introduce facts to disoute the infamous 'I know one single reason why a team will win or lose' commentary.
Careful or you will cut the posts on this board in half if people catch on.

 

[letekro]

It's all in the way it's worded.

"Why we won't win it all" is definitive.

"What we must overcome to win it all" is hopeful and positive.

Also, they've got some red zone challenges, to be sure - yesterday was a clear indication of that, but statistically speaking, the playoffs are what's known as a SSS (small sample size). 3 games, several trips to the red zone...success percentage can widely vary based on one or two possessions.

I hear you that we could get hot over a 3-game stretch, but I think my thread wording is fine given that we are dead last in red zone efficiency without Gronk. What you are talking about falls into the "hope" category, and I'm not sure what the point of discussing that is, since we all "hope" the Patriots will win.

Of course, if the Pats had an elite D, we might be able to overcome the red zone problem, but they don't, and no reinforcements are coming. So, it is not just the red zone that will prevent them from winning; I just worded it that way since the Gronk injury is fresh and we have known for a few weeks now that we would not be having an elite D in the playoffs this year.

 

[letekro]

Screw that. The "rational mind" causes folks like you to turn off the television or leave the stadium with the Patriots down by 12 with 2 minutes left. Your line of thinking is best reserved for hindsight, not to concede defeat before it happens.

I did neither. I also intend to watch the playoffs even though I don't think the Patriots have any realistic chance to win the SB, if that's OK with you. But only if it's ok with you, so please let me know. Thanks

 

[Rob0729]

Until this offense is back to full strength with what they have left (meaning Thompkins and Dobson returning), we will not know if they can score with consistency in the red zone.

 

[Tunescribe]

I did neither. I also intend to watch the playoffs even though I don't think the Patriots have any realistic chance to win the SB, if that's OK with you. But only if it's ok with you, so please let me know. Thanks

Since you ask, I wouldn't waste my time bothering with it if I were you. Why waste your time? You've concluded their cause is futile.

 

[Gronkandez]

We can still win. McD needs to be more creative in the red zone. With our running game, there is no reason why we can't keep defenses off-balance down there.

The two things we are horrible at, Red Zone efficiency and third down defense, can be fixed with some proper coaching, creativity, and some balls and willingness to do something different.

They need to get back to ridley and run in the red zone. He as a sub back here and there is wasting his ability. Fumbles be damned. Take a chance and go with it.

I agree with both of these posts. On that 3rd and 4ish before their last FG I was really hoping they would run the ball then go for it if they came up short. Blount was bowling guys over all game long.

 

[Ring 6]

I hear you that we could get hot over a 3-game stretch, but I think my thread wording is fine given that we are dead last in red zone efficiency without Gronk. What you are talking about falls into the "hope" category, and I'm not sure what the point of discussing that is, since we all "hope" the Patriots will win.

Of course, if the Pats had an elite D, we might be able to overcome the red zone problem, but they don't, and no reinforcements are coming. So, it is not just the red zone that will prevent them from winning; I just worded it that way since the Gronk injury is fresh and we have known for a few weeks now that we would not be having an elite D in the playoffs this year.

However, your statistics will be irrelevant to their success in the playoffs. What they do on the field in those games would.
If you used a bad regular season stat in an area you consider crucial to eliminate SB contenders half of the winners wouldn't have won.

 

[Brady6]

Red Zone efficiency is the difference b/w winning and losing in the NFL (and yesterday was a good example of that). Guys aren't open in the red zone like they are in the other parts of the field so you need to have guys that can catch the ball when covered. Unless the miraculous happens and Dobson returns healthy and fully integrated into the offense, the Pats do not have that Post-Gronk, and therefore I think they are facing overwhelming odds to win games against quality opponents in the playoffs. The below is just an amazing stat illustrating that the Patriots are an elite red zone offense with Gronk and a terrible one without him.

Since 2011, quarterback Tom Brady is 21-of-34 when throwing to Gronkowski in the end zone. On passes in the end zone to other targets over that span, Brady is 26-of-97 with four interceptions.

New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

I think it's unfair to expect this team to win it all personally. If they do it would be one of the most impressive feats I've witnessed in my lifetime. When you consider teams like the Falcons, Giants, Raven, Texans and others who crumbled in the face of minimal adversity this team going 11-5 or 12-4 and making the playoffs despite all it's faced is a great achievement in my opinion. Would I love for them to win a championship? Hell yeah but I won't see it as failure if they don't given the circumstances.

 

[letekro]

While red zone efficiency is certainly one stat worth looking at, but I would not go so far as to proclaim that is so important that it is the difference between winning and losing in the NFL.


First, a look at some of the top ten Red-Zone offenses in the NFL in 2013.

3. Dallas (70.5%); currently 7-7, 10th in the NFC playoff picture
4. Detroit (61.2%); currently 7-6, 8th in the NFC
5. Oakland (59.5%); 4-10, 13th in the AFC, eliminated
8. Cleveland (58.1%); 4-10, 15th, eliminated
9. Tennessee (57.8%); 5-9, 11th, eliminated


Next, among the bottom five there are a pair of potential playoff teams:

31. Philadelphia (45.8%); 8-6, currently #3 seed in the NFC
28. Green Bay (49.1%); 7-6-1, a half-game off the NFC North lead


Now a look at some of the top Red Zone defenses:

2. Baltimore (39.4%); 7-6, currently in 7th in the AFC
3. Detroit (40.0%); a top-5 RZ team in both categories is 7-6
5. NY Jets (45.5%); 6-8, 10th, eliminated
6. Tampa Bay (45.5%); 4-10, 14th, eliminated
7. Buffalo (48.9%); 5-9, 12th, eliminated
9. St. Louis (52.7%); 6-8, 11th, eliminated

And among the worst red zone defenses are the #25 Colts (clinched a playoff spot), #26 Denver (#1 seed) and #27 San Diego (7-7, on the bubble one game behind Miami).



While I do agree that red zone play is important (and that it needs to improve for the Patriots), I would also suggest that it is not an absolute difference between winning and losing in the NFL.

Thanks. This is informative. Obviously, no purely offensive or defensive metric will be conclusive because a great offensive team with a terrible defense is just as bad as a great defensive team with a terrible offense. However, since the newly introduced variable is the bad red zone offense (caused by Gronk's departure), my post focuses on that. A post saying "we will not win it all because we are not good enough overall", while true, is not really compelling.

 

[Sciz]

If there's anything I've learned over the past few seasons, it's that the only acceptable answer to "why won't [team] win it all?" is "because they've been eliminated from playoff contention."

 

[RayClay]

Jermaine Wiggins Rod Rutledge

Troy Brown David Patten Charles Johnson Fred Coleman

6th in points Super Bowl Champion

 

[letekro]

Jermaine Wiggins Rod Rutledge

Troy Brown David Patten Charles Johnson Fred Coleman

6th in points Super Bowl Champion

That's why I'll continue to watch. There is always a chance, even where the evidence suggests that chance is remote.

 

[dales804]

I agree with both of these posts. On that 3rd and 4ish before their last FG I was really hoping they would run the ball then go for it if they came up short. Blount was bowling guys over all game long.

All game long? His first two runs of the game, the 1st and 3rd offensive plays for NE, went for 11 and 9 yards, respectively. That was about 42% of his total yardage for the day. He had 6 of his 11 carries go for two or less yards. I think they need to run more, too, and while Blount has been running better lately (i.e. not going down at first contact) he wasn't anything amazing yesterday.

 

[chasa]

why we wont win it all?

Because its really hard to win a superbowl?
Because there are going to be 11 other teams in the playoffs looking to win it

 

[neuronet]

never fails....half this fanbase WANTS failure all the time...it must be to prop up their puny egos or some Freudian shyt

For me it is all about expectation management. When my expectations are high/optimistic, the let down hurts. When my expectations are low, and turn out to be wrong, it is an awesome rush.

I think this is common, but it seems even more common with Boston sports fans. I tend to chalk it up to years of disappointment with the Pats and Sox. You learned to not let your expectations get too high...(I grew up a fan in the 1970s with some amazing teams that never won the big game).

OTOH, the OP isn't exactly going out on a limb. RZ efficiency is extremely important, and without Gronk ours takes a hit.

Between homerism and pessimism is realism. That's what I try to be, but often it comes off as pessimistic...I think most of the pessimistic fans would say they are realists. E.g., when down 24-0, is it really being pessimistic to say we don't have much of a chance? No. But you hope they pull it out, and don't go overboard and say BB and Brady are done, need to be fired, that Brady is too old for a comeback, etc..

It is possible to be an intelligent realist. I haven't quite figured out how to do it yet, though, I have to admit. :bricks:

 

[RayClay]

That's why I'll continue to watch. There is always a chance, even where the evidence suggests that chance is remote.

As to your original contention...Dobson and Thomkins have good size and skills, and with the bunch of slot type receivers, RBs and a great Rb/Wr we have lots more options than some former Patriots champions who had nothing to compare with Gronk (I'll include Watson and Graham in that category).

Reply to a recent poster..yeah it's damn hard, it's not supposed to be easy and other flawed teams will win it if we aren't as hungry as the past.

 

[Ring 6]

Jermaine Wiggins Rod Rutledge

Troy Brown David Patten Charles Johnson Fred Coleman

6th in points Super Bowl Champion

By week 15 of the regular season, the last 3 Champions appeared to have virtually no chance of winning a SB.

2012 Ravens (fresh off a 34-17 loss to the team they would play in the div round by the way, their 3rd consecutive loss)
2011 Giants 7-7
2010 Packers 8-6 and not even in if the playoffs ended week 15

 

[RayClay]

By week 15 of the regular season, the last 3 Champions appeared to have virtually no chance of winning a SB.

2012 Ravens (fresh off a 34-17 loss to the team they would play in the div round by the way, their 3rd consecutive loss)
2011 Giants 7-7
2010 Packers 8-6 and not even in if the playoffs ended week 15

It's the least predictable of the major sports IMO. Odd shaped ball takes funny bounces, great game plans put more talented teams on defensive ans emotion and biorhythms, for lack of a better term means, on any given Sunday.

Not that I like vulgarity (well maybe I do) but it's encouraging to me that Brady would be pissed to lose if he was down to a team full of waiver wire castoffs. There's something about Brady this year that's really exciting. He looks like somebody stole his bike after every loss and I have to think all those rookies and young players are catching some of that fever.

 

[letekro]

By week 15 of the regular season, the last 3 Champions appeared to have virtually no chance of winning a SB.

2012 Ravens (fresh off a 34-17 loss to the team they would play in the div round by the way, their 3rd consecutive loss)
2011 Giants 7-7
2010 Packers 8-6 and not even in if the playoffs ended week 15

This is true, but those teams were playing their best ball at the end of the year. Anything is possible, but I would be surprised to see the Pats at their best in the coming weeks without Gronk and with the rookie receivers and half the defense and offensive line all hobbled.